Moody’s places the NYT Co. on Ratings Review

To those of us that are civilians in the world of investments..that means a possible “downgrade on the company’s Baa1 senior unsecured and Prime-2 commercial paper ratings.”

Goodness. Doesn’t that suck for their stockholders. From the E&P writeup:

The review comes on the heels of company’s double-digit ad revenue declines in December and January.

“The current pace of revenue declines are more than Moody’s had anticipated for 2008,” wrote Moody’s lead analyst John Puchalla.
The ratings firm disclosed it is going to keep an eye on the New York Times’ ability to reduce operating costs above the previously announced $230 million in 2008 and 2009 and the company’s plan for free cash flow.
Puchalla wrote Moody’s will monitor the Harbinger/Firebrand proxy fight but it’s not “integral” to the review.

Wonder what it means for us readers.

White House demands correction from NYT

But the important part of this story is…the White House did NOT demand a correction to the language in the main body of the writeup. From the Editor and Publisher article:

One of the top national stories of the day is the front-pager in The New York Times which suggests that White House involvement in the controversy surrounding the destruction of the CIA “torture tapes” was much wider than previously known.

The White House has kicked back against the Times on various other front-page reports in recent years but today it has asked for something specific: a “correction” of the headline’s deck.

The Hill, the Washington, D.C. newspapers, reports, “Catherine Mathis, senior vice president of corporate communications for the newspaper, stated that the sub-headline has been changed, adding that a correction would be printed. However, Mathis also pointed out that the White House did not challenge the contents of the article.” (emphasis mine)

Ain’t that special? 😉

Artwork by The Worried Shrimp